Warfare & Tactics

Im not complaining about any kind of engagement. Variety is good.

Putting links on grid only favors the larger force who already has the advantage. Removing links reduces variety of fights on grid and opportunities for periphery engagements.

Entirely depends on the frigate in question and the fit so its hard to answer generically. Certainly i am not going to be running head long into what i know to be a linked, faction fit, snaked and well flown Garmur pilot without at least snakes and a good counter fit.

When deciding to engage someone who i know is using links i view the fight as a 1v2. Some 1v2s cannot be won, some can, it is entirely situation dependent and i have never seen a problem in having to adjust my tactics accordingly. In the same way i would adjust for a true multi person engagement.

I am linkless when i solo and most of the time linkless when in gang. Just because ppl who have an alt are usually too lazy to take it out.

Not having off grid links is a bad excuse not to do small gang

Do you actually believe this stuff or are you just tossing out random distractors?

EVE is a sandbox. Just because your too cheap to PLEX another account, doesn't mean others are not. Adapt or die (or quit).

And by adapt, I mean either fly with friends; or get an alt if you don't have friends.

Ehhh, this is getting complicated now. It's partly true and partly false. Forcing links on grid would mean fewer small fleets can use them, since some smaller fleet compositions can't afford to place a stationary/slow expensive ship on the field and/or at risk. It's also true though that some smaller fleets with proper maneuvering can still put their links ships on the field at very little risk if they are maneuvered properly since t3c's are mobile/tanky for a cruiser and can "nullify" interdiction (does that sub take up the links slot?), very different from the days when links were on command ships.

More importantly, this change would affect fleets similarly in both cases between forcing them on grid, and using crosi's suggestion which is to use a weapons timer. In both cases, the smaller fleet's links ship is at greater risk since it has to be evading points and direct fights all the time. So it's not a very good argument for crosi, and does look like a random distractor.

Most importantly, it doesn't address the pay-to-win factor of links. This is the more important issue I feel. You should not get significant combat bonuses by paying extra money to CCP, and links is the #1 way to do that - a method which is very commonly used. Whether proposed changes favor smaller or larger fleets isn't the issue at all, and EVE will never be a game that favors solo or small gang in the first place. Those fights are reserved for elite pilots who know what they are doing, and are equipped to do it, usually against a much less skilled opponent, which won't fundamentally change when links change.

The bottom line here is what are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to make links-providing ships, which are currently mostly risk-free, more at risk to provide their bonuses? Or are you trying to remove pay-to-win? Because currently removing links entirely is really the only thing that will substantially reduce the amount of pay-to-win in eve online. The other suggestions from crosi and may will both result in what crosi said - smaller fleets keep links docked up and larger fleets bring them out in their "new" mechanic.

First, nobody is complaining besides you. The people posting here are providing valuable arguments to the topic and I haven't seen anyone with a whiny stake involved in the issue besides yourself, a known user of links/alts. When I encounter someone such as yourself (like last night/two nights ago) who is obviously flying a linked faction ship with likely implants and boosters, I simply choose not to fight them, which is exactly what our FC did because he's unsurprisingly, not a ******.

Second, your attacks on the individuals shows you have little case to actually make on the issue when it comes to actually presenting an argument.

Third, and obviously as a consequence to 2nd, you still haven't addressed the issue that links are a pay-to-win mechanic at the core.

You don't need to pay for a second account to have a JF alt, you just need a friend who knows how to cyno. I've done cyno duty before, it's not overly complicated or difficult to get into.

And having "more people" is not pay to win, it's recruit to win. Big difference and has been demonstrated well by goons and other blob fleets since the beginning of eve. If those guys are paying their players real USD to log onto the game, then you have a case for p2w, but there's not much you can do about that - unlike links, which can be removed immediately.

It doesn't have to be on a second account, you just happen to have it there.

You can stop being a child about it already. Are you paying money for an in-game direct combat bonus, y/n? Rhetorical question, the answer is yes. It is the definition of pay to win.

You mean boosting your fleet by undocking a command ship? That's not dumb, it's the intended use of the mechanic. You think it's dumb because you gamed the system, as many others do, by buying a second account and boosting yourself with an off-grid ship. This I would consider an exploitation of the mechanic, and probably CCP has let it go because it brings them extra money.